2018 PRO thread

[853guy]

"UCI president, David Lappartient, has confirmed that Froome’s case will not be heard before the race starts on 4 May. But two senior cycling sources have stated that ASO, the French company that runs the Tour, has more discretion on whom it registers for its event and has no intention of letting a rider race with a potential anti-doping violation hanging over him.

ASO is understood to be confident that it could resist any legal challenge from Team Sky as it has clauses in its rules about safeguarding the image of the race. This would be a bitter blow for Froome, who is chasing a fourth successive victory in cycling’s most famous race and a record-equalling fifth win in total."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/ ... nisers-aso

[maquisard]

It is looking increasingly likely that Froome and Sky's strategy is to string out the case until after the Giro and Tour and then serve any ban (most likely 6-9 months) in the off season. If that happens it will be very very bad for cycling.

Froome should not be at the start of either the Giro or Tour. I actually quite like to see one of Sky's other GC riders (Thomas or Poels) have an opportunity at leadership.

[REGICYCLE]

Surely the ban would be back-dated to the Vuelta?

[boysa]

Yes, any ban would be backdated to the point where he gave the sample. They can string it along, but ultimately it won't matter if the powers-that-be get their heads out of the sand and issue an honest ruling. We can look back to Contador's suspension as proof.

[Calnago]

So if the final result is that he gets a ban and it’s backdated to last years Vuelta, but he is allowed to ride this year’s Tour in the meantime and potentially wins it, then he’ll be stripped of the win, correct? That would really suck for the then “real winner for 2018” who had to stand in second spot the whole time and not revel in the glory of victory at the actual time of the event. It’s unfortunate that the decision making process seems to be so messed up.

[boysa]

Exactly. This is why the race organizers are so against him riding. Unfortunately, it is more of the same, usual garbage and there is no telling when we'll have resolution. Seriously, what could possibly take so long?

The one game Sky and Co. may be playing at is hoping Froome wins another GT (or two) and then no one will have the balls to issue a suspension that would strip him of two or possibly even three titles.

[Calnago]

The races are pretty much in the big sponsors pockets these days. They need the sponsors more than the sponsors need them. Lose a team like Sky being properly represented and so goes a bunch of $$$$, be it directly or indirectly.

[bilwit]

Exactly. This is why the race organizers are so against him riding. Unfortunately, it is more of the same, usual garbage and there is no telling when we'll have resolution. Seriously, what could possibly take so long?

The one game Sky and Co. may be playing at is hoping Froome wins another GT (or two) and then no one will have the balls to issue a suspension that would strip him of two or possibly even three titles.

a battle between the highest paid lawyers possible

[DOUG]

Exactly. This is why the race organizers are so against him riding. Unfortunately, it is more of the same, usual garbage and there is no telling when we'll have resolution. Seriously, what could possibly take so long?

The one game Sky and Co. may be playing at is hoping Froome wins another GT (or two) and then no one will have the balls to issue a suspension that would strip him of two or possibly even three titles.

There was this American guy a while back that had 7 TDF titles stripped...

[Rondje]

The races are pretty much in the big sponsors pockets these days. They need the sponsors more than the sponsors need them. Lose a team like Sky being properly represented and so goes a bunch of $$$$, be it directly or indirectly.

I think you underestimate the power of the ASO. The ASO is by far the strongest party in the cycling world and could decide what they want. I think Sky and all their sponsors need the ASO more than the other way around. Because the TDF is the biggest race of the season with worldwide viewers, you don't want to miss that as a sponsor.

[wingguy]

They can string it along, but ultimately it won't matter if the powers-that-be get their heads out of the sand and issue an honest ruling. We can look back to Contador's suspension as proof.

You can't look at Contador's suspension as proof. Contador took a controlled substance, Froome took a specified substance. It does not follow that the rules concerning the suspension are definitely going to be the same.

[Daniel1975]

Press Association claims that ASO is thinking about keeping Froome out of the Tour de France, unless the salbutamol-case is cleared.
Like Rondje wrote, ASO is by far the strongest oranisation in cycling and Sky NEEDS de tour de france, not the other way around. The have in their rules that they will not let a rider race the tour if he has a potential anti-doping violation hanging over him.
This will put some extra pressure on SKY.

[micky]

Probably they are checking the Pros and Cons of possibly keeping him out, as they did with Astana years ago.

[zirxo]

Surely the ban would be back-dated to the Vuelta?

Probably not.
He hasn't taken an illegal substance, just went above the limit of an allowed substance. There's a big difference.

He will loose the Vuelta title and probably serve a ban when all this is resolved.

[Daniel1975]

If he gets a ban, SKY has to fire him according to their own rules.....